MICHAEL SULLIVAN, Plymouth: Pit bulls aren’t worth the risk

Friday

Jul 18, 2014 at 6:50 AMJul 21, 2014 at 11:48 AM

The debate over pit bulls goes on (“Pit bull kills a small dog on Wollaston Beach,” June 26).

Yes, there are good dog owners and bad dog owners. And yes, dogs can be a product of their environment. That is true of all dog breeds. But what can't be denied are the facts associated with pit bulls.

According to the ASPCA website – The Truth About Pit Bulls: “Pit bulls were genetically selected for their fighting ability, they have been bred to behave differently during a fight. They may not give warning before becoming aggressive, and they're less likely to back down when clashing with an opponent. When provoked, they may become aggressive more readily than another breed might. Sometimes they don't inhibit their bites, so they may cause injury more often than other dogs.”

The Journal of the American Veterinary Medical Association conducted a 20-year study on the most dangerous dog breeds based on the amount of fatalities they have caused. The American Pit Bull Terrier is, no surprise, at number one on the list of deadliest dogs. In this study the pit bull stood far ahead of all the other breeds, with 66 fatalities attributed to it.

The ASPCA website concludes with: “Pit bulls aren't all bad. They're not ferocious beasts to be feared and reviled. Pit bulls aren't all good either. … They require a great deal of exercise, proper training and responsible management.”

With their genetic breeding and statistical history of violence, is it worth the risk?

MICHAEL SULLIVANPlymouth

That's one opinion. What's yours? Click here to write a letter to the editor or leave a comment on the story. Read more columns, editorials and letters